REPORT 


OF  THE 


SELECT  COMMITTEE 
APPOINTED  TO  CONFER  WITH  THE  AUTHORITIES 

OF  THE 

STATE  OF  HEW  YORK, 

RELATIVE  TO  A  CONNECTION  OF  THE 

•-WJJ3E 


OF 


NEW  YORK  AND  PENNSYLVANIA. 


Mr.  PEMOSE,  Chairman. 


READ  IN  SENATE,  MAY  15,  1839. 


HARRISBURG: 
PRINTED  BY  E.  GUYER. 


1839. 


£ P 


iri 

3: 


REPORT. 


i 


I  he  committee  appointed  to  proceed  to  Albany  and  consuls 
with  the  constituted  authorities  of  the  State  of  New  York,  to 
ascertain  their  views  and  wishes  in  relation  to  a  connection  of  the 
public  works  of  that  State,  with  the  North  Branch  canal,  report : 

That  during  the  late  recess  of  the  Legislature,  and  in  discharge  of 
the  duty  committed  to  them,  they  repaired  to  the  city  of  Albany.— 
On  their  arrival  they  addressed  the  following  note  to  his  Excellency 
Governor  Seward. 


Albany,  April  9th,  1839. 


The  undersigned  have  the  honor  to  inform  his  Excellency  Gover¬ 
nor  Seward,  that  they  were  appointed  a  committee  by  the  Senate  of 
Pennsylvania  to  consult  with  the  constituted  authorities  of  the  State 
of  New  York,  “in  order  to  ascertain  their  views  in  relation  to  a  con¬ 
nection  between  the  North  Branch  division  of  the  Pennsylvania 
canal”  and  the  Chenango  or  Chemung  canals,  or  both,  and  that  they 
are  now  in  this  city  in  execution  of  the  duty  committed  to  them. 

Your  Excellency  is  no  doubt  aware,  that  the  Commonwealth  of 
Pennsylvania  has  been,  for  several  years  past,  engaged  in  the  con¬ 
struction  of  what  is  called  the  North  Branch  division  of  the  Pennsyl¬ 
vania  canal,  that  a  large  portion  of  that  canal  has  been  finished,  and 
that  the  greater  part  of  so  much  as  is  yet  to  be  made,  between  the 
present  point  of  termination  in  the  Wyoming  Valley  and  the  line 
between  the  two  States,  is  under  contract. 

Several  millions  of  dollars  will  be  required  to  complete  this  canal 
to  the  State  line,  but  without  a  connection  with  the  public  works 
of  the  State  of  New  York,  the  canal,  when  completed,  would 
be,  comparatively  speaking,  as  unprofitable,  as,  if  the  connection  be 
made,  it  will  be  highly  beneficial,  as  well  to  the  State  of  New  York 


\ 


able  commerce  in,  and  interchange  of  those  great  staples — coal,  plas¬ 
ter  and  salt. 

The  undersigned  respectfully  invite  the  attention  of  Governor 
Seward  to  this  subject,  and  his  consideration  of  the  proper  action  to 
obtain  such  a  conference  with  the  constituted  authorities  of  the  State 
of  New  York  in  reference  to  it,  as  their  appointment  warrants,  and 
the  great  importance  of  the  object  to  the  interests  of  both  States  re¬ 
quires. 

The  undersigned  have  the  honor  to  offer  to  Governor  Seward  the 
assurance  of  their  highest  respect. 


Governor  Seward  with  a  promptness  and  courtesy  highly  gratify¬ 
ing  to  your  committee,  immediately  transmitted  to  the  legislature,  a 
message  announcing  their  arrival,  and  inviting  the  adoption  of  such 
measures  as  the  irnpoitance  of  the  subject,  and  a  4 ‘becoming  comity 
towards  the  enlightened  and  enterprizing  Commonwealth  of  Pennsyl¬ 
vania”  required. 

The  Senate  and  House  of  Assembly,  with  equal  promptness,  ap¬ 
pointed  a  joint  select  committee,  the  Honorable  Messrs.  Dickinson, 
Maynard  and  Jones,  on  the  part  of  the  Senate,  and  the  Honorable 
Messrs.  Lewis,  Clark,  Hawley,  Denniston  and  Porter,  on  the  part 
of  the  Assembly,  “to  confer  with  the  delegation  of  the  Pennsylvania 
Senate,”  in  relation  to  a  proposed  connection  of  the  public  works  of 
New  York  and  Pennsylvania. 

This  committee,  constituted  of  gentlemen  whose  urbanity  and  in¬ 
telligence  were  alike  complimentary  to  our  State,  and  the  body  we 
had  the  honor  to  represent,  met  your  committee  and  held  with  them 
a  conference  on  the  interesting  subject  entrusted  to  them.  In  that 
conference  your  committee  verbally  presented  to  the  consideration 
of  the  honorable  committee  of  the  Legislature  of  New  York,  the 
weighty  considerations  in  favor  of  the  proposed  connection  between 
the  public  works  of  the  two  States,  and  were  invited  to  put  in  writ¬ 
ing  the  views  which  they  had  thus  given. 

In  consequence  of  this  request  your  committee  addressed  to  the 
New  York  delegation  the  following  communication. 


5 


Albany,  April  12,  1839. 

Gentlemen  la  our  conference  of  yesterday,  on  the  subject  of  a 
connection  between  the  North  Branch  division  of  the  Pennsylvania 
canal  and  the  canals  of  the  State  of  New  York,  by  the  Shenango  or 
Chemung  canal,  or  both,  we  had  the  honor  to  present  to  your  con¬ 
sideration  facts  bearing  on  this  question,  which  at  your  request  we 
1  now  submit  in  writing. 

Prior  to  the  session  of  1835-6  of  our  State  Legislature,  the  North 
Branch  division  had  been  completed  to  the  Lackawanna,  near  the 
head  of  the  Wyoming  valley,  and  within  what  is  called  the  Northern 
Coal  Field.  So  far  it  furnished  for  the  coal  of  that  region  a  prospect 
of  a  market  to  the  south  on  the  waters  of  the  Chesapeake  bay.  At 
this  point  the  policy  of  the  State  hesitated  and  paused  ;  but  at  the  ses¬ 
sion  of  1835-6,  it  was  determined  to  complete  the  North  Branch  di¬ 
vision  to  the  line  separating  the  two  States,  and  to  look  to  a  connec¬ 
tion  with  your  public  works  for  a  more  natural  and  convenient  market 
for  our  coal,  and  for  a  return  of  a  valuable  commerce  in  the  salt  and 
plaster  of  the  State  of  New  York.  The  approach  made,  at  a  great 
t  expense,  by  your  State  to  the  same  point,  by  the  construction  of  the 

Chenango  and  Chemung  canals,  leaving  a  distance,  in  the  case  of  the 
former,  of  forty,  and  in  the  latter,  of  but  twenty  miles,  between  the 
n  proposed  termination  of  the  North  Branch  canal  and  those  canals  re¬ 
spectively,  justified  the  belief  that  New  York  intended  to  form 
these  connections,  and  had  in  view  the  mutual  benefits  which  induced 
Pennsylvania  to  adopt  this  policy. 

From  the  Lackawanna  to  the  State  line  the  distance  is  ninety-four 
miles,  on  which  sixty-three  miles  of  this  canal  have  been  put  under 
contract,  and  about  one  million  of  dollars  have  been  expended.  To 
finish  the  entire  line  will  require  a  further  expenditure  of  about  two 
millions  of  dollars.  Should  New  York  refuse  to  connect  with  our 
public  works,  this  portion  of  the  North  Branch  canal  would  probably 
be  as  unprofitable  to  Pennsylvania,  as  the  Chenango  and  Chemung 
canals,  without  such  connection,  are  likely  to  be  to  New  York,  and 
’  hence  the  importance  to  Pennsylvania  of  ascertaining,  before  she  pro¬ 

ceeds  further  with  the  prosecution  of  this  work,  “the  views  of  the  con¬ 
stituted  authorities”  of  the  State  of  New  York  on  the  subject.  Should 
she  prosecute  the  work  with  vigor,  it  may,  and  no  doubt  will  be  com¬ 
pleted  in  two,  or  at  most  in  three  years ;  but  if  your  State  refuse  the 
connection,  it  is  obvious  that  it  will  be  but  prudent  on  the  part  of 
ours,  to  suspend  the  further  expenditure  of  money  on  the  work. 


6 


To  meet  the  objection  which  a  narrow  policy  might  suggest,  that 
by  this  connection  Pennsylvania  may  take  from  New  York  a  portion 
of  the  western  trade,  which  the  latter  now  enjoys,  we  had  the  honor 
of  suggesting  that  the  greater  distance  between  Buffalo  and  Philadel¬ 
phia,  and  the  same  place  and  New  York,  independent  of  the  embar¬ 
rassment  to  trade  which  the  transhipment  to  a  rail  road  at  Columbia 
presents,  went  to  show  that  apprehensions  on  that  score  were  not 
well  founded.  These  distances,  as  nearly  as  we  can  ascertain  them, 


are  as  follows  : 

Miles. 

From  Buffalo  to  Montezuma,  150 

From  Montezuma  to  Elmyra,  through  the  Chemung  canal,  82 

From  Elmira  to  the  State  line,  20 

From  the  line  to  Lackawanna,  94 

From  Lackawanna  to  the  junction  of  the  North  and  West  branch,  70 
From  the  junction  to  Juniata,  39 

From  Juniata  to  Harrisburg,  16 

From  Harrisburg  to  Columbia,  29 

From  Columbia  to  Philadelphia,  by  rail  road,  82 

Distance  by  the  Chemung  canal,  582 


From  Buffalo  to  Utica,  250 

From  Utica  to  Binghamton,  96 

From  Binghamton  to  State  line,  40 

From  State  line  to  Philadelphia,  351 


Distance  from  Buffalo  to  Philadelphia  by  the  Chenango  canal,  737 


i 


v 


The  distance  from  Buffalo  to  New  York,  through  the  Erie  canal,  51 1 

Showing,  independent  of  other  considerations,  among  which  is  the 
steamboat  navigation  from  Albany,  in  contrast  with  the  rail  road 
transportation  from  Columbia,  a  difference  in  distance  in  favor  of 
New  York. 

But  we  had  the  honor  of  turning  our  attention  to  a  view  more  con¬ 
genial  to  the  enlightened  government  of  our  State,  which  has  a  regard 
to  the  mutual  benefits  which  will  be  conferred  upon  both  communi¬ 
ties  by  the  proposed  connection.  Our  Northern  coal  field,  although 
within  the  territorial  limits  of  Pennsylvania,  by  its  position,  if  proper 
means  are  used  to  make  it  available  to  New  York,  may  be  considered 
as  belonging,  in  its  use  and  advantages,  rather  to  the  latter  than  the 


1 


former,  although  of  course  the  consumption  of  coal  in  New  York 
must  be  of  advantage  to  Pennsylvania. 

In  order  to  show  the  amount  of  advantage  which  New  York  would 
derive  by  the  proposed  connection,  from  the  coal  trade  upon  her  public 
works,  we  presented  facts  bearing  on  the  question  in  one  aspect,  the 
amount  of  revenue  she  was  likely  to  receive  from  this  trade  in  tolls 
upon  her  canals.  When  these  connections  are  made,  the  distance  by 
the  Chemung  canal  from  the  line  to  Buffalo,  will  be  252  miles. 
From  the  same  point  by  the  Chenango  canal  to  xiibany,  246 

We  assumed,  that  in  the  course  of  ten  years,  the  transportation  of 
coal  by  these  connections,  on  the  canals  of  New  York,  would  be 
equal  to  the  transportation  of  one  million  of  tons  per  annum,  a  dis¬ 
tance  of  two  hundred  miles.  This,  at  the  rate  charged  on  the  Penn¬ 
sylvania  canals,  six  mills  per  ton  per  mile,  will  produce  to  your 
State  the  very  large  sum  of  $1,200,000  per  annum;  not  very  far 
from  the  gross  revenue  now  derived  from  your  Erie  and  Champlain 
,  canals. 

In  order  to  show  that  this  estimate  was  not  extravagant,  we  refer- 
s  red  you  to  the  following  facts  : 

The  population  of  the  State  of  New  York  at  the  last  census,  was 
2,174,517.  The  population  of  London  is  1,800,000;  and  the  con¬ 
sumption  of  coal  in  the  city  of  London,  was,  in  the  year  1832, 
2,139,078  tons,  while  the  consumption  of  Great  Britain  is  variously 
estimated  at  from  twenty-two  to  thirty  millions  of  tons  per  annum. 
When  we  take  into  view  the  rapidly  increasing  population  of  your 
State,  the  almost  equally  rapid  consumption  of  wood,  the  multiply¬ 
ing  uses  to  which  coal  is  applied  and  applicable,  the  supply  of  the 
great  regions  round  our  inland  seas,  to  which  by  your  canal  there 
will  be  access,  and  the  consumption  in  the  steam  navigation  of  the 
lakes  and  the  ocean,  we  are  persuaded  that  the  estimate  made  is  not 
extravagant.  Considering  this  aspect  of  the  question,  regard  must 
also  be  had  to  the  tolls  on  other  articles  of  commerce  between  the 
two  States,  more  particularly  the  articles  of  plaster  and  salt,  the  use 
of  which  in  Pennsylvania  is  of  course  very  extensive.  Further  to 
support  this  view  of  the  question,  we  submitted  a  comparison  be- 
v  tween  the  ascertained  value  and  productiveness  of  canals,  depending 
on  agriculture  and  ordinary  commerce,  and  those  which  may  be  call¬ 
ed  coal  and  iron  bearing  canals. 

By  a  “  share  list,”  published  in  London,  in  October,  1833,  the 


8 


following  marked  difference  may  be  discovered  in  the  value  of  the 
two  descriptions  of  canals. 

British  Canals  on  which  Coal  is  not  Carried. 


Name. 

Share. 

Selling  price.  Dividend. 

North  Walsham  and  Dilham, 

£  50 

£io 

Oakham, 

130 

44 

Wey  and  Arun,* 

100 

32 

Portsmouth  and  Arundal  ,* 

50 

10 

Regent, 

100 

16 

Grand  Surrey, 

100 

22 

Bassing  Stroke, 

100 

5.5 

Cray  don, 

31.2! 

1 

Thames  and  Medway,  (old  stock,) 

30.4! 

1 

(new  stock,) 

100 

0 

Great  Caledonia,  in  Scotland,  across  the  island,  lock  20  by  40, 

and  172  feet  long,  carrying  a  frigate  of  thirty-two  guns,  and 

a  mer- 

chant  vessel  of  one  thousand  tons, 

cost  £986,924  |  tolls  in 

1829, 

£2,575  4s.  Qd. ;  expense  £4,573  Os, 

.  lid. 

British  Canals  upon  which  Coal  is  transported. 

Name  and  cost. 

Share.  Selling  price.  Dividend. 

Grand  Junction,  $8,888,888, 

£100 

<£245 

£12 

Leeds  and  Liverpool, 

100 

470 

20 

Coventry, 

100 

600 

32 

Neath, 

107 

290 

15 

Swansey, 

100 

220 

12 

Cromford, 

100 

300 

18 

Glamorganshire, 

100 

290 

12* 

Oxford, 

100 

595 

32 

Forth  and  Clyde, 

100 

545 

25 

Stafford  and  Worcester, 

140 

610 

32 

Somerset, 

50 

170 

11 

Mersey  and  Irwell, 

100 

640 

37! 

Duke  of  Bridgewater’s  canal  cost  $1,555,555  ;  yields  an  income 
per  annum  equal  to  its  original  cost. 

*  These  two  canals  connect  London  and  Portsmouth,  the  depot  of  the  British 


navy. 


9 


In  Ireland,  the  Grand  canal  between  Dublin  and  the  river  Shan¬ 
non,  and  the  Royal  canal  from  the  same  city  to  another  point  on  the 
same  river,  the  former  one  hundred  and  fifty-six  miles  in  length,  and 
the  latter  eighty-three  miles,  both  passing  through  a  rich  agricultural 
country,  with  a  dense  population,  do  not  pay  in  tolls  enough  to  de¬ 
fray  expenses. 

The  canals  in  France,  depending  upon  agriculture  and  ordinary 
commerce,  are  unprofitable  in  tolls,  however  beneficial  to  the  coun¬ 
try  in  other  respects.  A  similar  difference  between  the  canals  thus 
contrasted,  is  discovered  in  Pennsylvania. 

Our  main  line,  or  Juniata  division,  has  as  yet  yielded  but  three 
per  cent,  on  its  cost,  while  the  Delaware  division,  on  which  the  coal 
of  the  Lehigh  is  carried  to  Philadelphia,  has  exceeded  five  per  cent. 
The  difference  is  still  more  striking  in  the  case  of  the  Lehigh  navi¬ 
gation  and  Schuylkill  navigation;  the  former  canal,  forty-six  miles  and 
three  fourths  in  length,  was  finished  in  1819,  at  a  cost  of  $1,000,000; 
it  extends  from  Easton,  on  the  Delaware  river,  to  the  company’s  coal 
mines  at  Mauch  Chunk.  The  shares  of  the  stock  of  this  company 
are  fifty  dollars,  and  they  sell  in  the  market  at  eighty-seven  dollars. 
The  Schuylkill  navigation,  from  Philadelphia  to  Port  Carbon,  one 
hundred  and  eight  miles  in  length,  was  finished  in  1824,  at  a  cost  of 
$2,966,180;  the  shares  are  fifty  dollars,  and  have  sold  for  one  hun¬ 
dred  and  seventy  dollars.  The  company  haspdivided  twenty-five  per 
cent,  on  their  stock.  That  is  the  maximum  of  dividend  to  which  by 
their  charter  they  are  permitted  to  go. 

The  facts  we  submit  form  a  powerful  argument  in  favor  of  the 
connection  between  the  works  of  the  two  States;  and  we  would  re¬ 
spectfully  add,  that  although  we  consider  the  argument  drawn- from 
them  conclusive,  upon  the  question  of  mutual  and  equal  benefit  to 
both  States,  we  would  do  violence  to  our  own  feelings  of  high  re¬ 
spect  for  the  intelligence  of  New  York,  if  we  did  not  advert,  which 
we  ask  leave  to  do,  to  a  higher  consideration  bearing  upon  this 
subject,  than  the  mere  question  of  the  amount  of  tolls  which  New 
York  will  receive  when  these  connections  are  made.  This  con¬ 
sideration  is  of  the  benefits  which  will  be  conferred  upon  the  people 
of  the  two  States,  in  the  increased  means  of  subsistence,  comfort 
and  civilization,  which  will  be  brought  within  their  reach.  The 
stone  coal  has  been  well  regarded  by  those  who  have  properly  con¬ 
sidered  the  subject,  as  the  basis  of  the  wealth  and  power  of  Great 


10 


Britain,  and  her  mines  of  this  product,  as  a  “  source  of  greater  riches 
than  ever  issued  from  the  mines  of  Peru,  or  from  the  diamond  grounds 
at  the  base  of  the  Neela  Mulla  mountains.”  New  York  and  Penn¬ 
sylvania,  by  connecting  their  public  works,  will  share  in  this  great 
source  of  individual  and  national  wealth,  and  reciprocate  in  the  inter¬ 
change  of  great  staple  commodities,  the  mutual  benefits  and  advan¬ 
tages  which,  from  their  natural  position  and  circumstances,  they  seem 
destined  to  impart  to  each  other.  It  is  not  simply  with  reference  to 
income  to  these  States  respectively  that  the  question  is  important ;  it 
is  of  more  consequence  in  view  of  the  comforts  and  means  of  subsist¬ 
ence  which  are  to  be  produced  to  a  numerous  population  of  free 
people  which  will  inhabit  them . 

Will  you  allow  us  to  say  that  the  pleasant  intercourse  with  the 
representatives  of  your  great  State,  in  the  different  branches  of  her 
government,  which  our  visit  to  Albany  has  permitted  us  to  have, 
occasions,  on  our  part,  an  increased  interest  in  every  new  bond  of 
connection  between  the  two  States. 

We  have  the  honor  to  be, 

Very  respectfully,  your  obedient  servants, 

CHARLES  B.  PENROSE, 
WM.  PURVIANCE, 

W.  T.  ROGERS, 

P.  S.  MICHLER, 

E.  KINGSBURY,  Jr. 

Committee  of  the  Senate  of  Pennsylvania. 

To  the  Hon .  Messrs .  Dickinson,  Maynard  and  Jones,  and  the 
Hon.  Messrs.  Lewis,  Hawley,  Clark,  Denniston  and  Porter, 
Committee  of  the  Senatt?  and  House  of  Assembly  of  the  State  of 
New  York. 

The  joint  select  committee  of  the  New  York  Legislature  being  ap¬ 
pointed  for  the  purpose  of  conference  merely,  did  not  consider  them¬ 
selves  warranted  by  the  terms  of  their  appointment,  to  express  an 
opinion  on  the  subject  of  the  conference,  or  to  advise  the  Legislature 
of  that  State  what  action  they  judged  to  be  expedient.  But  at  the 
request  of  your  committee  for  such  information  as  to  the  views  of 
the  honorable  bodies  which  they  represented,  as  they  might  be  able  to 
communicate,  they  with  that  candour  and  courtesy  which  marked 
their  intercourse  with  your  committee,  informed  them  that  there  ex- 


11 


isted  in  the  Legislature  a  diversity  of  opinion  on  the  subject  of  the 
proposed  connection  of  the  works  of  the  two  States.  That  while  a 
part  of  these  honorable  bodies  were  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  connec¬ 
tion  and  the  adoption  of  measures  for  its  immediate  construction, 
there  was  another  portion  as  decidedly  opposed  to  it,  and  who  enter¬ 
tained  the  belief  that  to  permit  it  to  be  made  at  all,  would  be  injuri¬ 
ous  to  New  York,  by  diverting  a  large  part  of  her  western  commerce 
from  her  great  commercial  metropolis  to  ours.  Another  poition  of 
the  Legislature  regarded  the  connection  with  favor,  but  were  of 
opinion  that  it  was  inexpedient  for  New  York  at  present  to  act  on 
the  subject. 

The  chairman  of  the  joint  select  committee,  however,  who  was 
himself  decidedly  in  favor  of  the  immediate  construction  of  the  con¬ 
nection,  said  that  the  information  which  he  had  communicated,  was 
given  to  meet  our  request,  rather  as  the  individual  opinion  of  the 
members  of  the  joint  select  committee,  than  as  an  official  communica¬ 
tion. 

Your  committee  in  the  same  spirit  declared,  that  they  entertained 
the  belief  that  upon  the  favorable  action  of  the  State  of  New  York, 
would  depend  the  prosecution  by  Pennsylvania  of  a  work,  the  value 
of  which  depends  in  a  great  degree  upon  that  action. 

Your  committee  said  that  they  did  not  know  the  peculiar  situation 
of  the  State  of  New  York  in  reference  to  her  system  of  internal 
improvements,  and  that  Pennsylvania  did  not  desire  to  present  any 
question,  which  might  occasion  embarrassment,  by  asking  for  imme¬ 
diate  action,  but  that  it  seemed  to  your  committee  to  be  but  just  as 
well  as  prudent,  before  Pennsylvania  proceeded  with  the  further  ex¬ 
penditure  of  money  on  the  North  Branch  canal,  to  obtain  from  the 
Legislature  of  New  York  a  resolution,  pledging  the  faith  of  that 
State  to  make  the  proposed  connection.  That  it  was  the  opinion  of 
your  committee  that  the  Legislature  of  Pennsylvania  would  be  satis¬ 
fied  with  such  a  resolution,  and  would,  if  it  were  passed,  proceed  to 
the  completion  of  this  canal. 

Having  accomplished,  as  far  as  it  was  practicable,  the  purpose  of 
their  appointment,  your  committee  left  Albany. 

Since  that  time  the  joint  select  committee  by  their  chairman,  the 
Hon.  Daniel  S.  Dickinson,  on  the  fourth  day  of  the  present  month* 
made  in  the  Senate  the  following  report : 


12 


May  4,  1839,. 

Report  of  the  joint  select  committee  appointed  to  confer  with  the 
delegation  of  the  Pennsylvania  Senate ,  in  relation  to  a  proposed 
connection  of  public  works  of  the  States  of  New  York  and  Penn¬ 
sylvania. 

Mr.  Dickinson,  from  the  joint  select  committee  appointed  by  a  con¬ 
current  resolution  of  the  9th  of  April  last,  to  confer  with  the  honora¬ 
ble  delegation  of  the  Pennsylvania  Senate  in  relation  to  a  proposed 
connection  of  public  works  of  the  States  of  New  York  and  Pennsyl¬ 
vania,  reports: 

That  in  pursuance  of  said  resolution  they  waited  upon  the  highly 
intelligent  delegation  from  the  Pennsylvania  Senate,  consisting  of  the 
Hon.  Charles  B.  Penrose,  Speaker  of  that  body,  and  the  Hon. 

Messrs.  Purviance,  Rogers,  Michler  and  Kingsbury,  members  there¬ 
of,  who  were  delegated  to  confer  with  and  ascertain  the  views  of  the 
constituted  authorities  of  the  State  of  New  York  upon  the  subject  of 
connecting  the  public  works  of  New  York  and  Pennsylvania  by  the 
junction  of  the  North  Branch  division  of  the  Pennsylvania  and  the 
Chenango  or  Chemung  canal,  or  both  of  them,  at  the  State  line,  in 
the  valley  of  the  Susquehanna,  near  Athens,  in  the  State  of  Pennsyl¬ 
vania.  The  North  Branch  division  of  the  Pennsylvania  canal  has 
been  completed  up  the  Susquehanna  river  as  far  as  Lackawanna,  near 
the  head  of  the  Wyoming  valley,  and  within  the  inexhaustible  coal 
fields  of  that  region.  Lackawanna  is  ninety-four  miles  distant  from 
the  State  line,  the  point  of  the  proposed  connection  with  the  canals 
of  this  State. 

It  seems  that  the  Legislature  of  Pennsylvania  during  the  session  of 
1835-6,  in  the  belief  that  New  York  would  eventually  extend  her  ca¬ 
nals  to  the  proposed  point  of  junction,  in  case  she  could  there  con¬ 
nect  with  the  canals  of  Pennsylvania,  determined  to  extend  and  com¬ 
plete  the  North  Branch  division  up  the  river  to  the  State  line,  and 
for  the  purpose  of  calling  the  attention  of  this  State  to  the  subject, 
and  giving  strong  evidence  of  the  intentions  of  Pennsylvania,  the  con-  4 

struction  of  the  canal  was  commenced  near  the  point  of  the  proposed 
connection. 

About  sixty-three  miles  of  this  canal  have  been  placed  under  con-  ^ 
tract,  and  about  one  million  of  dollars  have  been  expended  upon  its 
construction;  but  inasmuch  as  it  will  require  two  millions  or  upwards 
more  to  complete  the  extension,  and  as  it  will  be  of  little  general 


13 


utility  and  afford  a  tiifling  income,  unless  connected  with  the  canals 
of  this  State,  a  more  prudent  and  cautious  policy  has  induced  that 
State  to  pause  and  learn  the  views  of  the  constituted  authorities  of 
this  State  before  proceeding  further  with  the  said  extension.  In 
short,  they  avow  it  to  be  the  intention  of  the  Legislature  of  Pennsyl¬ 
vania,  so  far  as  they  understand  its  sense,  to  abandon  the  proposed 
extension,  unless  this  State  shall  indicate  her  intention  to  extend  the 
Chenango  or  Chemung  canals,  or  both  of  them  at  some  future  period ; 
in  such  case,  they  express  the  belief  that  the  Legislature  of  Pennsyl¬ 
vania  will  at  the  coming  session,  commencing  the  7th  of  the  present 
month,  make  an  appropriation  for  the  completion  of  said  extension, 
and  that  the  same  will  be  finished  with  all  convenient  speed,  proba¬ 
bly  in  the  course  of  two  years. 

At  the  request  of  the  joint  committee,  the  Pennsylvania  delegation 
submitted  to  them  a  brief,  but  able  and  interesting  communication 
upon  the  subject  of  the  proposed  connection  of  the  public  works  of 
the  two  States,  embodying  within  a  small  compass,  much  valuable 
information,  placing  the  mutual  advantages  to  be  derived  by  the  con¬ 
nection,  in  a  strong  and  convincing  light,  which  communication  is 
herewith  submitted. 

The  power  delegated  to  the  joint  select  committee  was  confined, 
in  the  terms  of  the  resolution  appointing  them,  to  that  of  a  mere  con¬ 
ference ,  and  the  discharge  of  their  duty  does  not,  in  their  opinion, 
necessarily  require  of  them  any  thing  further  than  to  report  the  result 
of  their  interview  with  the  Pennsylvania  delegation. 

The  committee,  however,  beg  leave  to  submit  that  the  subject  of 
the  proposed  connection  is  one  eminently  deserving  the  early  consid¬ 
eration  of  the  Legislature.  It  is  obvious  that  at  a  comparatively 
small  expenditure,  the  public  works,  now  unproductive  and  a  heavy 
tax  upon  the  State,  may  be  rendered  much  more  valuable,  if  not  a 
source  of  revenue  ;  and  the  internal  trade,  consisting  of  an  exchange' 
of  the  salt  and  plaster  of  New  York,  for  the  coal  and  iron  of  Penn¬ 
sylvania,  independent  of  the  increased  tolls  and  salt  duties,  which  will 
be  paid  into  the  treasury,  cannot  fail  to  advance  the  interests  of  all 
classes,  in  a  large  section  of  the  State.  Fuel  is  already  an  article  ob¬ 
tained  with  some  difficulty,  and  at  an  expense  which  has  become  bur- 
thensome  in  the  cities  and  villages  of  the  middle  and  western  parts  of  the 
State.  The  forest  is  fast  receding  before  the  blows  of  the  axemen, 
and  it  is  perfectly  obvious  that  in  a  short  time,  coal  will  be  used  not 


14 


only  for  fuel  in  all  such  places,  but  for  manufactures,  at  the  salt 
works,  and  for  propelling  locomotives  upon  rail  roads  and  machinery,, 

The  rich  mineral  treasures  of  these  States  are  of  themselves  alike 
inexhaustible  sources  of  wealth ;  but  their  value  and  utility  must  be 
increased  to  an  incalculable  extent,  by  increasing  facilities  for  their 
cheap  transportation  through  the  interior  and  consequent  ready  ex¬ 
change. 

The  policy  of  uniting  the  works  of  Pennsylvania  and  New  York, 
is  opposed,  by  some,  upon  the  ground  that  it  will  tend  to  divert  the 
trade  of  the  west  and  of  the  interior,  from  the  city  of  New  York  to 
that  of  Philadelphia.  From  the  facts  stated  in  the  annexed  communi¬ 
cation,  showing  the  inward  distance  and  necessary  transhipments  on 
the  Philadelphia  route,  it  would  seem  that  if  trade  is  so  diverted,  it 
must  be  very  limited  in  amount.  It  is,  doubtless,  the  only  objection 
which  can  be  urged  against  the  proposed  connection.  But  if  it  shall 
be  found  to  be  outweighed  by  more  than  corresponding  advantages, 
arbitrary  and  imaginary  boundaries  should  not  alone  prevent  the  con¬ 
struction  of  a  work,  otherwise  desirable  and  advantageous. 

The  committee  deeply  regret  that  circumstances  beyond  their  con¬ 
trol,  have  prevented  their  giving  to  this  subject  the  attention  which  its 
importance  demands,  and  which  the  courtesy  of  the  delegation,  with 
whom  they  were  appointed  to  confer,  has  invited  and  merited. 

They  deem  it  due  to  that  branch  of  the  Legislature  of  a  sister  State, 
represented  by  said  delegation,  as  well  as  to  the  gentlemen  composing 
the  same,  that  the  sense  of  this  Legislature  be  expressed  upon  the 
subject  of  the  proposed  connection  of  public  works  ;  and  although  it 
is  not  within  their  province  to  advise  what  action  should  be  had  in 
the  premises,,  to  the  end  that  the  Legislature  may  express  its  opinion, 
they  have  proposed  resolutions  which  they  ask  leave  to  introduce. 

RESOLUTIONS. 

Resolved ,  (If  the  Assembly  concur,)  That  it  is  expedient  to  com 
nect  the  public  works  of  this  State  with  those  of  Pennsylvania,  at  some 
convenient  period,  by  uniting  the  Chenango  or  Chemung  canal,  or 
both  of  them,  with  the  North  Branch  of  the  Pennsylvania  canal,  at 
the  State  line  near  Athens,  in  the  State  of  Pennsylvania. 

Resolved ,  That  his  excellency  the  Governor  be  requested  to  trans¬ 
mit  a,  copy  of  the  foregoing  resolution  to  the  Governor  of  Pennsyl1 


15 


vania,  with  a  request  that  the  same  be  laid  before  the  Legislature  of 
that  State. 


Your  committee  are  informed,  by  a  letter  received  from  the  Hon. 
D.  S.  Dickinson,  that  he  had  exerted  himself  daily,  after  these  reso¬ 
lutions  were  introduced,  to  get  action  upon  them,  but  without  success. 
That  he  repeated  this  effort  on  the  7th  instant,  that  being  the  last 
day  of  the  session,  when  the  unanimous  consent  of  the  body  is  ne¬ 
cessary  to  take  up  such  resolutions,  and  the  objection  of  one  of  the 
Senators  again  defeated  the  attempt,  and  the  Legislature  adjourned 
sine  die ,  without  having  considered  them. 

Your  committee  understood  that  their  Legislature  passed  a  bill 
for  a  survey  of  the  Chemung,  of  the  particular  provisions  of  which 
jthey  are  not  informed,  and  that  a  bill  which  was  pending  in  the 
House  of  Assembly,  for  the  extension  of  the  Chenango  canal,  was 
not  acted  on,  and  remained,  at  the  adjournment,  among  the  unfin¬ 
ished  business  of  the  session. 

Your  committee  cannot  close  their  report  without  adverting  to  the 
distinguished  courtesy  and  respectful  consideration  with  which  they 
were  received  by  the  constituted  authorities  of  our  great  sister  State, 
who,  no  matter  what  may  be  the  view  entertained  with  regard  to  the 
interests  of  that  State  on  the  subject  of  the  proposed  connection, 
evinced  that  friendly  feeling  and  courteous  comity  which  should  ever 
prevail  between  our  sisterhood  of  republics. 

However  this  may  have  contributed  to  the  personal  gratification 
of  your  committee,  it  is  due  to  the  Senate  which  they  had  the  honor 
to  represent,  as  well  as  our  sister  State,  that  the  amicable  and  candid 
spirit  with  which  your  committee  was  received  and  treated,  should 
be  the  subject  of  respectful  reference,  as  it  always  will  be  a  source 
of  pleasant  recollection  of  personal  kindness  to  the  members  of  your 
Committee.  They  submit  the  following  resolution  : 

Resolved,  That  the  committee  be  discharged  from  the  further  con¬ 
sideration  of  the  subject. 


* 


